I do think however, that a PM need not be a technical expert in the
area they are working in. It does help in most cases but, equally, as
long as the PM is not afraid to ask questions and acknowledges his
lack of knowledge then, sometimes, having a person who is not a
technical expert in the area can result in more probing questions
causing the team to consider issues in areas they may normally
overlook. As long as the PM follows a process/framework and can
facilitate his technical people then the project can be a success.
On the other hand, appointing technical people to run projects simply
because they were good engineers/analysts is called the 'halo effect'
and is rarely a good thing. Some formal PM training can go a long way
with these people - as long as it is a PM role they are interested in
and can step back from the technical aspects.
Good project management involves asking questions of the project team which will qualify the answers to these three fundamental questions.
In turn, software development PMs like myself, who are very technically
qualified can also ask detailed questions. I have had many instances
where teams are overlooking what might be a great risk in a project
because they feel that they can overcome it during the software build
phase. But having managed many projects I might have experience and
might want to exclude a component from a first build phase (in
Iterative or Agile Methodology).
Vince feels it is no longer a role for technically proficient PMs to
understand to any great detail the underlying technical points. In my
last two positions I have found this to not be totally true. I agree
that I need to let the software development architects and engineers
code without me looking over their shoulder, but it certainly is my
role to recognize what requirements they understand, how they will
attempt to achieve them successfully, and what risks are understood to
exist. Many times a team might have two ways of approaching a
requirement, and one might be more appropriate for future upgrades or
requirements. I know a number of architectural project managers who
agree with me that they cannot do their jobs properly without a very
good working knowledge of construction processes.
--Simon
your thoughts?
John
Dear Vince
Another point that ‘PM’ should be a good mentor & facilitator to keep the team motivated, with high morale and conscious of their own performance in the interest of the project.
Thanks & Regards R C Goyal
BE AN AMBASSADOR OF QUALITY rcg...@gmail.com;rcg...@avrms.com , Mob: 00919869463964
Project management is a skill that I as a project manager can transfer
from industry to industry. I have done it three times and led projects
in retail, IT and the financial industry. The trick is to always have
good people on the project who understand the technical and/or industry
side better than you do. (i.e. a technical lead / architect on my
current software development project.) This allows me to focus on the
project, the processes and most importantly the customer.
This much said, there are of course projects that require that the PM
has more than just a passing know-how of the industry. For instance, I
would not feel comfortable if I were asked to lead a project in a
medical devices company.
So... it really depends on the project.
Regards,
Cornelius Fichtner, PMP
The Project Management Podcast
http://pmpodcast.blogspot.com/